Japan Shifts Military Posture to Defend Against Chinese Threat

I like it.

At New York Times, "Japan to Shift Its Military Toward Threats From China":

TOKYO — In what would be a sweeping overhaul of its cold war-era defense strategy, Japan is about to release new military guidelines that will reduce its heavy armored and artillery forces pointed northward toward Russia in favor of creating more mobile units that can respond to China’s growing presence near its southernmost islands, Japanese newspapers reported Sunday.

The realignment comes as the United States is making new calls for Japan to increase its military role in eastern Asia in response to recent provocations by North Korea as well as China’s more assertive stance in the region.

The new defense strategy, likely to be released later this week, will call for greater integration of Japan’s armed forces with the United States military, the reports said. The reports did not give a source, but the fact that major newspapers carried the same information suggested they were based on a background briefing by government officials.

The new guidelines also call for acquiring new submarines and fighter jets, the reports said, and creating ground units that can be moved quickly by air in order to defend the southern islands, including disputed islands in the East China Sea that are also claimed by China and Taiwan. These disputed islands are known as the Senkakus in Japanese and the Diaoyu in Chinese.

Details of the realignment, which had been delayed a year by the landmark change of government in September 2009, have been leaking out since large joint military drills earlier this month between Japan and the United States that included the American aircraft carrier George Washington.

More at the link.

This is especially interesting since I've been blogging East Asian security issues. Japan issued some of the most forceful statements on the recent North Korean artillery attacks, for example. And this discussion of Japan's emerging posture reminds us of realists argument on the constraining and shaping forces of international power dynamics. China's growth is clearly triggering some strategic thinking in Tokyo, and the growth of Beijing's power --- combined with the ambiguity surrounding the intentions of the Chinese leadership --- is pushing Japan even tighter into its alliance with United States. I've written more often on regime change North Korea, and not to mention some reflections on China's influence on the peninsula, but I just saw this recent piece from Elizabeth Economy, and it makes Japan's moves look quite natural considering: "The End of the 'Peaceful Rise'?"

Howie Klein and the Death of Mark Madoff

Following up my earlier post, The Rhetorican offers some thoughts, "Bring It, Comrade … And I Mean *You*":

I had the feeling Madoff’s death would be celebrated by Lefties somewhere on the internet just because he’s a Madoff, but there’s counterculture; and then there’s counterstupidity ...

I don’t mean that Howie Klein is a wealthy spoiled brat who doesn’t really stand for “revolution”. I’m sure the dude is serious about his progressiveness (but given that he was the president of one of Warner Bros. record labels for more than a decade, odds are he has a bit of the capitalist pig in him).

Mr. Klein, revolutionary justice is something you and your ilk must bring about on your own. No one will ever know what – exactly – prompted Mark Madoff to kill himself, but two things are certain: (1) he didn’t kill himself because you and the red horde surrounded his fancy New York co-op and left him no alternative but to hang himself; and (2) his death – as good as it must make you feel – hasn’t made for a more just society anywhere in this country.

Revolution is something you do, not something you wait for the establishment to do for you. So, by all means, Mr Klein: Bring it, comrade. Let’s dance.

RELATED: "Mark Madoff Suicide: Bullied to Death?" Well, it'd be progressive bullies if he was. These are very bad people.

Bush v. Gore

Ten years ago today.

Not too many legal bloggers back then, which is good with respect to Scotty Lame-ieux.

RELATED: George Will, "A Decade After Bush v. Gore."

Karen Alloy

Why you should be following her on Twitter, as I always say:

The Atlantic Turns a Profit, With an Eye on the Web

At NYT:

How did a 153-year-old magazine — one that first published the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” and gave voice to the abolitionist and transcendentalist movements — reinvent itself for the 21st century?

By pretending it was a Silicon Valley start-up that needed to kill itself to survive.

The Atlantic, the intellectual’s monthly that always seemed more comfortable as an academic exercise than a business, is on track to turn a tidy profit of $1.8 million this year. That would be the first time in at least a decade that it had not lost money.

Getting there took a cultural transfusion, a dose of counterintuition and a lot of digital advertising revenue.

“We imagined ourselves as a venture-capital-backed start-up in Silicon Valley whose mission was to attack and disrupt The Atlantic,” said Justin B. Smith, president of the Atlantic Media Company, who arrived at the magazine’s offices in the Watergate complex in 2007 with a mission to stanch the red ink. “In essence, we brainstormed the question, ‘What would we do if the goal was to aggressively cannibalize ourselves?’ ”

What that meant more than anything else was forcing one of the nation’s oldest magazines to stop thinking of itself as a printed product.

Separations between the digital and print staffs in both business and editorial operations came down. The Web site’s paywall was dismantled. A cadre of young writers began filling the newsroom’s cubicles. Advertising salespeople were told it did not matter what percentage of their sales were digital and what percentage print; they just needed to hit one sales target. A robust business around Atlantic-branded conferences took off.

The strategy is not a cure-all template for troubled media companies, of course. The Atlantic, a tiny enterprise compared with vast corporate magazine empires like Time Inc. and Condé Nast, has only about 100 business and editorial employees and a circulation of 470,000. A scale that small means that a few million dollars could push the company over the top — an amount that would barely register on the balance sheets of many other publishers.

Since 2005, revenue at The Atlantic has almost doubled, reaching $32.2 million this year, according to figures provided by the company. About half of that is advertising revenue. But digital advertising — projected to finish the year at $6.1 million — represents almost 40 percent of the company’s overall advertising take. In the magazine business, which has resisted betting its future on digital revenue, that is a rate virtually unheard of.

RTWT.

There's a discussion of publisher David Bradley, who bought the magazine in 1999 and immediately drove it into the ground. Banging his head against the wall, he conceded failure and adopted the changes cited above, along with new editorial leadership. What's fascinating is the decision to turn The Atlantic into a blogging headquarters and destination for online readership (looks like a model to me, although NYT discounts it). Andrew Sullivan accounts for 25 percent of The Atlantic's traffic, and both Matthew Yglesias and Ross Douthat did well there before moving on. Megan McArdle is an interesting voice, and perhaps Ta-Nehisi and Goldberg add some utility, although not for me. Longstanding Atlantic writer James Fallows also blogs there. But it's mostly Sullivan that's interesting to me. No need to provide much background. He went so far overboard that even folks at The Atlantic questioned his sanity. That said, I don't ever recall the top editors questioning Sullivan during his years-long descent into an obstetric gynecology-induced paranoid personality disorder. He hardly speaks for America, in any case.

That said, The Atlantic is a heavy-duty high-brow magazine, and while I don't blog it too often, I still respect it and enjoy reading it.

I can just do without all those lefty bloggers.

Added: R.S. McCain links: "Math Problem: If the Atlantic Monthly Makes a Profit of $1.8 Million a Year ..."

Taimur Abdulwahab al-Abdaly, Stockholm Suicide Bomber, Was Living in Britain

At London's Telegraph:

An Islamic suicide bomber who attacked Christmas shoppers in Sweden at the weekend is a British university graduate and was living in this country until two weeks ago.

Taimur Abdulwahab al-Abdaly tried to set off a car bomb packed with gas canisters in a busy shopping street in Stockholm. The car caught fire and the bomber fled the scene before blowing himself up 300yd away 15 minutes later, injuring two bystanders.

It emerged last night that Abdulwahab, who was due to turn 29 yesterday, is a former physical therapy student at Bedfordshire University in Luton, and that his wife and three young children still live in the town.

MI5 is now investigating possible links with extremists in Luton, whether the bomber was radicalised at the university and claims that he was helped by an extremist group in Yemen, the base for al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

And more from Atlas Shrugs, "Facebook Memorial Page for Sweden Jihad Bomber." And at Legal Insurrection, "All Swedes Are Malmö Jews Now":

Make no mistake about it, the Islamists do not operate in a vacuum; they operate with the connivance or at least tolerance of the anti-Israel left.

No doubt.

Silvana Escudero Goes Topless on Argentine 'Dancing With the Stars'

Now that's my kind of blogging!

Way to work the Googe-bombing, Reliapundit!

I think R.S. McCain's influence is being felt far and wide across the conservative 'sphere.

At Astute Bloggers, "POP CULTURE GONE WILD - Playboy model Silvana Escudero stripping off topless and simulated sex during the Argentinian edition of 'Dancing with the Stars' - NSFW":

POP CULTURE GONE WILD:

Watch the video: Sex scandal in 'Dancing with the Stars'

Playboy model Silvana Escudero stripping off topless and simulated sex during the Argentinian edition of 'Dancing with the Stars'

Check Astute Bloggers for the commentary.

She's a beauty.

But yes, it's a bit much. Seriously. The only thing missing is the penetration. But no doubt this stuff is totally cool with the progressive left. They're all about glorifying global culture over the U.S., and mainstreaming "consensual" adult incestuous relationships.

Metrodome Roof Collapse Video Goes Viral

At The Blaze, "Update: New Time-Lapse Video Shows Snow Collapse of Minneapolis Metrodome," and CNN, "Heavy snow wreaks havoc in Midwest; Metrodome roof collapses."

And even TMZ, "Metrodome Roof Collapses -- Crazy Video!!!"

Via Twitter.

Why Progressives Read Boing Boing

Seriously.

No wonder they demonize people of faith and romanticize atheists: "Cthulhu sex-toys!"

Ishmael Reed is One Big Bad Black Progressive!

And from Berkeley too. Talk about street creds.

At NYT, "What Progressives Don't Understand About Obama." (Via Memeorandum.)

Basically, to be black and in your face is to be a bold progressive.

Progressives have been urging the president to “man up” in the face of the Republicans. Some want him to be like John Wayne. On horseback. Slapping people left and right.

One progressive commentator played an excerpt from a Harry Truman speech during which Truman screamed about the Republican Party to great applause. He recommended this style to Mr. Obama. If President Obama behaved that way, he’d be dismissed as an angry black militant with a deep hatred of white people. His grade would go from a B- to a D.

What the progressives forget is that black intellectuals have been called “paranoid,” “bitter,” “rowdy,” “angry,” “bullies,” and accused of tirades and diatribes for more than 100 years. Very few of them would have been given a grade above D from most of my teachers.

When these progressives refer to themselves as Mr. Obama’s base, all they see is themselves. They ignore polls showing steadfast support for the president among blacks and Latinos. And now they are whispering about a primary challenge against the president. Brilliant! The kind of suicidal gesture that destroyed Jimmy Carter — and a way to lose the black vote forever.

Unlike white progressives, blacks and Latinos are not used to getting it all. They know how it feels to be unemployed and unable to buy your children Christmas presents. They know when not to shout. The president, the coolest man in the room, who worked among the unemployed in Chicago, knows too.

Get that?

He's dissing white progressives as not bein' sufficiently down with the brothas. You gots to be out and loud, mofo!

Big Tent at Talk Left is not diggin' it (that's a white progressive blog, I guess). But ethnic folks at The Swash Zone sho be shufflin' that jive!

Just read an op-ed piece in the New York Times by writer Ishmael Reed entitled What Progressives Don't Understand About Obama. It was an amen article, a piece with which I nodded continuously in agreement as I read it and murmured amen under my breath. To appreciate Reed's piece, read it, no summary can do it justice. He takes on the ad nauseum criticism that Present Obama is weak, ineffectual, ball less, and not tough enough to be president. A smart guy, but too nice and too concerned about keeping the peace. Too afraid to give the Republicans the ass whipping that they deserve.

I've been accused of being "nice" as in I don't want people to dislike me. Not true. I'm going to tell you up front that some of you aren't going to understand the truth that this article speaks and you may not like my attitude. See, as a black person I'm so sick and tired of white liberals who have still enjoyed the privilege of being white trying to tell a black man how to navigate in a white world.

You don't get it and you lack the humility to simply accept that you do not. Instead you attack the President as being weak, without balls, a sellout and any other demeaning, emasculating terminology that you can devise. You don't understand what it is to be black and walk in his shoes and you're too damned arrogant to listen to those of us who try and tell you.

More black victimology at the link. And at the author's blog, "The Examined Life."

And the progressive count-down for me as racist, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 ...

Added: Linked at Just One Minute, "Obama's Problem - He's Trying to Lead a Bunch of Racist Whites."

Terrorism in Sweden

Here's the headline at CSM, "Sweden Reeling After 'Terror Crimes'."

You think?

Two attacks Saturday evening brought the struggle with terrorism to Sweden, which until now has avoided the violent attacks that have taken place in other European nations.

And at New York Times, "Sweden Launches Terror Inquiry After Stockholm Bombing."

Well yeah.

But see Atlas Shrugs, "Jihad in Sweden: Homicide Bomber, Screaming Allahu Akbar, Targets Christmas Shoppers." Also Bare Naked Islam, and Fausta's. (And Memeorandum.)

And from Blazing Catfur, "Swedish Prime Minister: 'Dear Muslim Terrorists Please Kill Me Last OK?'"

Plus, Michelle adds:

They’ll try, try, try, try, try, try again. Guaranteed.

The Case Against Assange — Journal Editorial Report

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey interviewed at top, and the full broadcast below:

The Scene Makers: Actors Who Defined Cinema in 2010

A strange yet exquisite feature, at NYT, "Actors Create 14 Decisive Moments," and short video features here.

Progressives Cheer Mark Madoff Suicide as 'Revolutionary Justice'

At DownWithTyranny!, "At This Point Do We Have to Be Hoping for a Revolution?" (And Memeorandum.)

From Howie Klein in the comments:

On the other hand, more rich people and the criminal spawn can hang themselves, the way Mark Madoff did. That's justice served -- and revolutionary enough.

Amazing.

Folks may have heard. Mark Madoff hanged himself exactly two years after his father Bernard was arrested in the financial Ponzi scheme indictment. See NYT, "Madoff’s Elder Son Found Dead in Suicide." (And at Legal Insurrection and Memeorandum.)

But read DownWithTyranny! Howie Klein is actually a top activist with the Firedoglake Act Blue coalition, but these folks make no qualms about calling for revolution. Clearly the death of Mark Madoff is fulfilment in miniature of leftist demands for decapitation of the Old Regime, on the order of the French and Russian Revolutions. The context is this student's "fight back" speech, below, announcing revolutionary solidarity with Britain's fight-the-cuts uprising from last week's Coalition of Resistance Conference in Britain. DownWithTyranny! then links to a revolutionary manifesto from Ian Welsh, "An American Future." The commentary reflects less an explicit agenda than a prediction for the pivotal crisis of capitalism in the near term. While Welsh is ambiguous on the ripeness for proletarian agitation, cleary Howie Klein and his progressive comrades are welcoming an epic confrontation with the capitalist state. The death of Mark Madoff is not a sad family tragedy but a symbol of state crisis, and, ominously, of the murderous reckoning awaiting the forces of reaction. This is, most of all, completely in keeping with the violent sensiblities of the left, which have been on display all week long at this blog. All I can say is hold your most cherished values close, and your loved ones even closer. The proletarian crisis needs a revolutionary vanguard to bring class consciousness to the contented and under-mobillized masses. Britain is gripped right now by an austerity crisis, and at home we've had some of our own anarcho-socialist violence. I hope I'm wrong, as I always say. But one of these days a new Weatherman-style organization will break out again with a campaign of domestic terrorism. And that's just the beginning. It's a dreadful thought, but these folks are simply not going wait for more suicides. I'm convinced, in due time, they'll work to accelerate the forces of "revolutionary justice" for thousands of Mark Madoffs.

Elizabeth Edwards Eulogized

The story's at New York Times and Memeorandum.

And Althouse writes on the day, with a link to the New York Times, "Elizabeth Edwards, Through Many Eyes."

Also, at Us Weekly, "Elizabeth Edwards' Oldest Daughter Eulogizes Mom at Funeral."

And I closed comments at my big post from earlier in the week. By now it's a feedback process in the thread, and the cumulative, repetitive nature to the comments have emboldened some. For example:

MoeLarryAndJesus said...

Donald Douglas is a contemptible political hack who can eat shit and die.

Frustrated that I closed comments, some visitors commented elsewhere at the blog (Bernie Sanders, "Hate Mail"), and I've gotten two angry e-mails so far, with no doubt more on the way. Boing Boing linked, so that explains some of it, and check the link there for another round of vile left-wing demonology and hatred. It's no doubt fascinating. But all this buzzing anger will die down subside next week.

RELATED: "The Powerful Corpse of Radical Progressivism," and "Creepy Stalker Shows Up at Christianity Today."

Bernie Sanders Speaks 8 Hours in Tax Bill Protest On Senate Floor

C-Span has video to the entire 8-hour spectacle at the link.

And at NYT, "With Filibuster, C-SPAN Has a Hit On Its Hands" (via Memeoradum). And at WaPo, "Vt. Senator Takes His Time - For More Than 8 hours":

At 10:24 Friday morning, Sen. Bernard Sanders of Vermont took to the floor of the Senate to share a few thoughts about the tax-cut plan brokered by President Obama and Republican leaders.

Well after the sun had set and most of his colleagues had flown home, Sanders was still sharing - about taxes, bad trade deals and "the crooks on Wall Street," among many other topics.

"China, China, CHINA!" he yelled at one point, stressing that the $14 trillion national debt was largely being financed by the Chinese government's decision to continue buying U.S. bonds.

By early evening Sanders took to reading letters from constituents who had been hit hard by the Great Recession.

Sanders yielded at times to Democratic colleagues who wanted to speak briefly against the plan, but otherwise he held the floor until nearly 7 p.m., his thick Brooklyn-born accent filling the chamber.

It looked a lot like a good old-fashioned filibuster, only Sanders wasn't actually stopping anything. Under a bipartisan deal reached Thursday, a vote would be held Monday on the tax deal no matter how long Sanders spoke or what he said Friday.

"You can call what I am doing today whatever you want, you it [sic] call it a filibuster, you can call it a very long speech," said Sanders, an independent who caucuses with Democrats. "I'm not here to set any great records or to make a spectacle. I am simply here today to take as long as I can to explain to the American people the fact that we have got to do a lot better than this agreement provides."

It's not really a filibuster, but you gotta give up up for old Bernie in any case.

Creepy Stalker Shows Up at Christianity Today

A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away, I first learned the truth about a sleazy leftwing scumbag with a creepy crush on me who felt left out when I ignored him:

Geez, professor... I'm feeling left out, here... No replies for me?

That's Racist Repsac3, and ever since it's been one long sickening bid for attention, to the point now where I have a dangerously deranged stalker obsessed with my every word. RacistReppy is a lot like this guy: "Creepy Facebook Stalker Exposed On Twitter." And of course, as I made news with my commentary on Elizabeth Edwards, this dangerous stalker has been following me everywhere. Last week was unreal in a lot of respects --- and extremely enlightening. The left's response revealed the true face of progressive nihilism, and RepRacist3's been leading the pack. It's chilling. Repsac3 is the Mark David Chapman of the blogosphere. Feigning decency, underneath a killer. Some of my readers have warned me, and with good reason. This demon has been hunting me down all week, finding my comments or links to my blog at LGM, Right Wing News, and elsewhere. He can even be found attacking me in the comments at Commonweal! No corner of the web is safe, but the best discussion is at Christianity Today, where RepRacist3 gets called out by reader Dan:

@repsasc3 at December 8, 2010

"I have, I think, somewhat of an odd version of God. I do not have an intervening God. I don't think I can pray to him -- or her -- to cure me of cancer."

"Elizabeth Edwards gave an extraordinarily radical answer: She doesn't believe in salvation, at least not in the standard Christian understanding of it, and she said as much..."

From this article it is not at all clear what Ms. Edwards believed theologically. We do know a few things she doesn't believe, tho. Historic Christian belief for one. How about you just let God sort it all out instead of judging others here or trying to pick a theological fight - which you would lose.

RepRacist3 shows up further down the comments and gets beautifully pummeled again. Folks should read the whole post, but the final comment really sums things up, from Barbara:

Are you yourself not judging this article's author very harshly? And many of us, who consider ourselves Christians, consider this article fair and well-written. The Bible does NOT say to never judge. In 1Cor chapter 5, Paul scolds the church for NOT judging a man for immorality. John 7:24 - "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment."

"Judge not, for we are not God" is not a Bible verse, and is not implied anywhere.

And note something about Christianity Today: They picked up my post because the author, Sarah Pulliam Bailey, thought It raised important issues. And considering the response up and down and all around, that fact speaks for itself. But unfortunately the debate saw more emotional heat than reason, which is why these couple of comments from Christianity Today are important. And to be clear: At this point my concerns have little to do with Elizabeth Edwards' crisis. Indeed, most of my commentary has focused on the larger question of the anti-religiosity of the collectivist left. And that is why the response has been so incredibly visceral. It's exactly as Murgatroyd indicated, "Anyone who disagrees with a left-winger and demonstrates that the left-winger is wrong is beyond all possible redemption, and must be hated with the white-hot intensity of the heart of the sun." But as noted, I relish the challenge. It strengthens me and clarifies my thinking, for now more than ever the nation is challenged. As Douglas Johnson remarked at Wall Street Journal, "it is conservatism which has slipped way past rigor mortis and has started to rot." And conservatism rots when it joins hands with the collectivist left. It winds up on the wrong side of goodness. And thus it's imperative for folks of genuine good will to stay strong. And that is a difficult thing, but my sense is that those who are strongest in faith do not recoil from the challenge. They stand strong and they affirm in prayer that we do right by Him. My friend ZTW spoke out forcefully on this:

I am saddened by the death of Mrs. Edwards, a woman who I probably could not disagree more with on her politics, but as a human being was faced with the same challenges we all are and, according to what she said, had removed God out of her life as a positive factor. There is never a more important time in our life that we need a God to turn to than when facing the end of life. I hope before her life ended that she realized she needed the love, forgiveness, and peace that only God can bring. The words written below have a lot of truth contained within them. Thanks Donald for speaking the truth.

As this essay goes live, RacistRepsac3 has yet another entry posted to the appropriately-named American Nihilist Blog: "Donald Douglas' New Low in Guilt by Association: You Resemble a Known Bad Man, Therefore, You're Bad." And with the picture of John Lennon there, I must say that's giving me the goosebumps of foreboding. I'm going to need a bodyguard.

Kristi Noem Delivers GOP Weekly Address

This is a perfect example of less is more, in her wonderful deliver and in her message of limited government.

Via Gateway Pundit and Dakota Voice. And at the Daily Republic, "US Rep.-elect Noem delivers Republican address":

U.S. Rep.-elect Kristi Noem delivered the weekly Republican address Saturday, reiterating her calls to cut spending and reduce the size of government.

The South Dakota Republican said in her remarks that she's encouraged by President Obama's proposal to renew the Bush tax cuts set to expire on Jan. 1.

Noem says small businesses need certainty, and renewing the tax cuts alone won't eliminate job uncertainty.

She also called for lawmakers to repeal the health care law passed earlier this year.

Noem says she's part of a new majority committed to being humble, more modest and more focused in addressing the nation's challenges.

RELATED: At Instapundit, "YA THINK? Political class, Middle America headed in opposite directions on economy."

President Barack Obama: 'I'm in Charge'

Kinda like former Secretary of State Alexander Haig, except that nobody shot the president. The One just gave it up for Bill Clinton. I know the Saturday address is prerecorded, but it's a relief to see the Obambi back as Commander in Chief:

And listening to POTUS, it's almost like he's had a religious conversion to supply-side economics. Except, well, not. For Obama, as everyone knows, the bipartisan tax deal was 100 times worse than pulling teeth. And of course at 3:30 minutes he confesses his solidarity with the soak the rich crowd, saying "I share their concerns ... I don't like those tax cuts either" ... those tax cuts on incomes over $250,000 annually. Kim Strassel nailed it at WSJ yesterday:

President Barack Obama wants the nation to know that he is on the verge of an important, bipartisan economic achievement. He'd also like the nation to know that he'd rather carve his own eye out with a blunt spoon.

Barring an outright revolt among House Democrats, Mr. Obama may well in the next week sign a tax package that demonstrates his ability to work with Republicans, that he notes will "speed up the recovery," and that two-thirds of Americans fully support, says Gallup. Compared to ObamaCare, this is political jet fuel.

Yet far from projecting bold and triumphant leadership, President Obama looks like a bitter, liberal Grinch. Call this the week of missed presidential opportunities, one that bodes ominously for whatever strategy this White House has cobbled together in the wake of its midterm defeat.

And see Peggy Noonan also at WSJ, "From Audacity to Animosity" (via Memeorandum).

Consensual Adult Incest

Is RepRacist3 Posting as Mr. Fluffy Pants at PuffHo? Because their arguments on "consenting relations" are strikingly similar.

Here's RepRacist3 commenting on Iowa's gay marriage ruling at The Daily Beast in April 2009:

I'm by no means a lawyer, but I'm of the opinion that, in the absence of a legal reason to forbid something, the state should allow it.

And Mr. Fluffy Pants:

It's consensual and between two adults. Let him go! Its none of my business. People have the right to live their lives out however they want so long as its not harming someone else. While I don't agree with incest, its really none of my business. He's not hurting anyone, his daughter isn't hurting anyone, let them go!

So long as they're not harming anyone else? That's the left's argument for gay marriage in a nutshell.

Dan Collins has more, "It’s a Family Affair." And Robert Stacy McCain at American Spectator, "But They Were Consenting Adults!"

RELATED: "A Columbia professor is arrested for incest — but isn't there a constitutional right to incest between consenting adults?"